Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Thus you claim your country to be stupid, and are proud of your employ of freedom to promote stupidity on the national level.

Just remember Tim Horton's is owned by the USA

Kovnik Obama wrote:It's a good thing then that nice maxims like these have very little relevance in reality.

Do they, though? Very few oppressive regimes act like they are governed by Darth Vader or Sauron, most such nations justify the actions of their security forces with the "need to keep order" and "prevent the evil [insert name of foreign country, ideology, religion or organization] from destroying their way of life" and how they just want to "protect the innocent people". Needless to say, anyone getting caught and incarcerated is then either a bandit, a terrorist or a foreign spy.

A good example for this would be Syria.

This, however, is also related: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Defense_Authorization_Act_for_Fiscal_Year_2012#Controversy_over_indefinite_detention

Frazzled wrote:

Thus you claim your country to be stupid, and are proud of your employ of freedom to promote stupidity on the national level.

Just remember Tim Horton's is owned by the USA

Like I care about that piss water they call 'steeped tea'...

Any 'fast-food' restaurant that doesn't take debit card as a policy deserves to fail, and it's a first world problem that they haven't already.

Do they, though? Very few oppressive regimes act like they are governed by Darth Vader or Sauron, most such nations justify the actions of their security forces with the "need to keep order" and "prevent the evil [insert name of foreign country, ideology, religion or organization] from destroying their way of life" and how they just want to "protect the innocent people". Needless to say, anyone getting caught and incarcerated is then either a bandit, a terrorist or a foreign spy.

The maxim suggest that trading freedom for security is something immoral, not that 'Dictators will use good Laws to do evil acts'. Someone who trades freedom for security still derseves security, and he probably still deserves some freedom. Otherwise, the consequence of that claim is that the only people who deserve freedom and security are those that can both assert freedoms and security for themselves : the tyrants.

Kovnik Obama wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Thus you claim your country to be stupid, and are proud of your employ of freedom to promote stupidity on the national level.

Just remember Tim Horton's is owned by the USA

Like I care about that piss water they call 'steeped tea'...

Congratulations, you've just been reported, not to Dakka Mods, but to the Canadian Mounties. Canada will not stand for such an insult to the greatness of Tim Horton's (wow someone actually drinks tea there?) Sinner! Blasphemer! Repent for the end of Kovnik is nigh!!!

Orlanth wrote:
Youre extra arrogant today then.

Or simply not humble.

Orlanth wrote:
Actually if you were 'smarter', you might try have a go at the logic rather than the speedtyping. Perhaps you cannot.

You mean reasoning, not logic. Logic would involve a series of proofs with monosyllabic articles standing in for elements, which is nice, and fun, but since your argument is basically that freedom is freedom (X=X) it would be pointless.

I provided you a means by which to define that which you claimed to be impossible to define, there's nothing left but for me to mock you.

Orlanth wrote:
For murder not to exist - i.e a killing not being murder
You must be free to kill - i.e. given the freedom to commit an act which if not enabled would be murder.

No, I can be free to kill, and murder can exist. I can kill, without material consequence, and still be called a murderer.

Orlanth wrote:
Its you're schtick.

Funny how you needed to illustrate "my shtick" by selectively quoting a part of my post that prefaced a decent amount of text. Perhaps, just perhaps, it isn't my shtick at all.

Orlanth wrote:
Not wondering if I will get a reasonable definition from you. Your last one was way off. Still stranger things have happened. You are not dumb, I wont accuse you of that, but you are not half as smart as you think. If you were you wouldn't post the way you do.

Sure I would, because its fun to annoy.

Either way, freedom is freedom is not a good, or reasonable position to argue from.

The song choices are horrible, but the controversy is being stirred up by the right because of their POV. Just like if Abortion were to be more regulated. The left would be up in arms about it. Why? Because they are fighting a war of hearts and words. Which ever side wins gets more of their poeple elected which equals more power. Standard Republic Operating Procedure. The true problem is the political class (including the Media; both sides) are willing to divide poeple to get the power they want. As Americans we let them.


This is a non-issue, but it was made into an issue to further an agenda. Study your history folks this kind of thing happened a lot in Athens and Early Rome when they were ruled as republics. The only difference is that we now get information within seconds, and armed rebellion uses guns instead of arrows.

Frazzled wrote:
Congratulations, you've just been reported, not to Dakka Mods, but to the Canadian Mounties. Canada will not stand for such an insult to the greatness of Tim Horton's (wow someone actually drinks tea there?) Sinner! Blasphemer! Repent for the end of Kovnik is nigh!!!

I also have a profound dislike for hockey. Don't tell them that, I'll get stoned to death with pucks and octopi.

And lot's of people prefer tea to coffee here. The Brits couldn't have done so many bad things to us without doing a few good...

mattyrm wrote:...they had to get up and pledge allegiance to the flag and say "Indivisible under God" and all this gak. And it really did stun me. I couldn't believe that they had children doing it, and I found it to be a really odious story. It felt almost like Red China style brainwashing.. she mentioned something about it being introduced in the 50s to combat the spread of communism or something?!

I did it until...5th grade? So until age 10. And yes, that's exactly what it is; "brainwashing" that people accept because they like it. Sort of like history courses pre-college, and in college if you talk to some.

mattyrm wrote:
Do you still do it in most kids schools?

I'm 26, so as of 16 years ago we did it.

mattyrm wrote:
Freedom this and freedom that.

Because America means freedom, and such.

Kovnik Obama wrote: Don't tell them that, I'll get stoned to death with pucks and octopi.

You live in Detroit?

Kovnik Obama wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
Congratulations, you've just been reported, not to Dakka Mods, but to the Canadian Mounties. Canada will not stand for such an insult to the greatness of Tim Horton's (wow someone actually drinks tea there?) Sinner! Blasphemer! Repent for the end of Kovnik is nigh!!!

I also have a profound dislike for hockey. Don't tell them that, I'll get stoned to death with pucks and octopi.

And lot's of people prefer tea to coffee here. The Brits couldn't have done so many bad things to us without doing a few good...

ya that came as a shock to me, and I've been banned from making tea. You go to put a cup in the microwave once

Kovnik Obama wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
Congratulations, you've just been reported, not to Dakka Mods, but to the Canadian Mounties. Canada will not stand for such an insult to the greatness of Tim Horton's (wow someone actually drinks tea there?) Sinner! Blasphemer! Repent for the end of Kovnik is nigh!!!

I also have a profound dislike for hockey. Don't tell them that, I'll get stoned to death with pucks and octopi.

And lot's of people prefer tea to coffee here. The Brits couldn't have done so many bad things to us without doing a few good...

All the Canadians I palled around with just skipped the tea and went straight to beer.

I don't pledge allegiance to the flag, mainly because it is just a symbol. Maybe instead of pledging to a piece of cloth that is a representation of our 'freedoms' we should pledge on the piece of paper that gives them to us.

My $0.02 on the flag pledge issue.

Frazzled wrote:
All the Canadians I palled around with just skipped the tea and went straight to beer.

Good men, all.

Kovnik Obama wrote:The maxim suggest that trading freedom for security is something immoral, not that 'Dictators will use good Laws to do evil acts'. Someone who trades freedom for security still derseves security, and he probably still deserves some freedom. Otherwise, the consequence of that claim is that the only people who deserve freedom and security are those that can both assert freedoms and security for themselves : the tyrants.

I'm fairly sure that this is not how that saying is supposed to be understood.

It's a criticism leveled against those who are willing to enslave themselves out of fear. A wake-up call for those who would voluntarily surrender their freedoms just because they are being told it's better for them.

Or rather ... perhaps it is as you say, but that trading all freedom for 100% security is something immoral. And in this instance I'd still be inclined to agree. My belief is that an ideal society needs to find a good balance between both and should not lean too far towards either extreme. This, of course, is easier said than done, but it should be obvious that there's a lot of fearmongering going on right now, and it makes me suspicious as to who has an interest in making people afraid, and what kind of power they get from the legislations passed in such an atmosphere.

An important difference also needs to be made between security for the state and safety for the individual citizen - a lot of people get these mixed up, allowing the government to increase the former but actually only wishing for the latter. Does anyone really want a return to McCarthian witch hunts? What about Operation Gladio? The lines between freedom and oppression are beginning to get pretty blurry here.

Lynata wrote: It's a dangerous development that may very well lead to "freedom" becoming nothing more but an empty word.

It was always, in America, an empty word.

Also, have you heard of the Red Scare?

Lynata wrote:
Freedom is very subjective, and I think most democratic governments....

The bold is the problem. I think it was Churchill that said something about that.

dogma wrote:Also, have you heard of the Red Scare?

The term I've heard just now as I quickly browsed the wiki entry since I forgot McCarthy's name. I've been familiar with the basics for a long time, though. I wouldn't call myself an expert on history, but I love reading about it.

dogma wrote:The bold is the problem. I think it was Churchill that said something about that.

Indeed he did. I used to agree with him, though by now I'm not so sure anymore. Or is it perhaps that what calls itself "democracy" today isn't what it should have been? Can something even be called "democracy" when the democratic elements seem manipulated by money and connections? How much influence can the ordinary citizen even take, and how much of it gets lost by the use of speakers who speak for speakers who speak for speakers who supposedly speak for him? There are many different forms that democracy has taken over the eons. Undoubtedly, some are more democratic than others.

Lynata wrote: I wouldn't call myself an expert on history, but I love reading about it.

Fair.

Lynata wrote:
Can something even be called "democracy" when the democratic elements seem manipulated by money and connections?

Always was, its just transparent now; sort of.

Lynata wrote:
How much influence can the ordinary citizen even take...

What does the ordinary citizen look like?

dogma wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
All the Canadians I palled around with just skipped the tea and went straight to beer.

Good men, all.

Once again, I must fight back conformism ; Red wine all the way to the inevitable gutrot.

Red wine is awesome with... hum... other sins

dogma wrote:Always was, its just transparent now; sort of.

Maybe. Or easier?
Is it delusion to believe that democratic governments once used to be more honest than they are now?

dogma wrote:What does the ordinary citizen look like?

I'm referring to options available not everyone, not even any individuals or groups of individuals. For example, in Germany you cannot elect the Chancellor - you are only allowed to choose between a number of candidates groomed for this job by the parties presenting them. In essence, people's influence on politics is extremely indirect; they can only try voting for people who are then voting for other people, etc. Maybe a more direct participation would solve a lot of issues.

I keep thinking about the asari's "e-democracy" from Mass Effect where everyone can vote on everything. A system like that might do a lot of damage if implemented right away, though. I'm not sure if the majority of humans are ready to make smart decisions, especially concerning long-term issues, and especially when lobbies and media still have this much hold over people's opinions. So I suppose that one shall remain a dream for another era. Could be interesting to see it implemented on a local level, however. Like some village. Just to see how it works out.

Mannahnin wrote:

What if they didn't say no because it's patriotic, but because it's a terrible song?

This.

That song is f'ing awful.

Kovnik Obama wrote:

dogma wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
All the Canadians I palled around with just skipped the tea and went straight to beer.

Good men, all.

Once again, I must fight back conformism ; Red wine all the way to the inevitable gutrot.

Red wine is awesome with... hum... other sins

wine is fine but whisky's quicker...

Lynata wrote:
Is it delusion to believe that democratic governments once used to be more honest than they are now?

Ask William Randolph Hurst.

Lynata wrote:
Maybe a more direct participation would solve a lot of issues.

Doesn't work in California, and Athens killed Socrates.

The simple fact is that governing a state involves a particular set of skills (different from Liam Neeson's), and not just any yokel can have a reasoned say on the matter.

Lynata wrote:
Could be interesting to see it implemented on a local level, however. Like some village. Just to see how it works out.

Some municipalities do work like that, at least in the US. Then there's the Basque Region.

LumenPraebeo wrote:Well....this country is made up of many different nationalities and religions, and as so, the american nationality is a collection of these. If there was no identity to it, then it would just be a collection of people in cities, cities in states, and states in a so-called nation. However, I do agree it is brainwashing. But I'm still not sure if it is a good or bad thing. The roots of a nation with a common cause must be established somewhere, or else its back to the 13/50 colonies all over again.

But this is the puzzling thing. When asked a question about a uniquely American thing (such as having a pledge of allegiance, let alone one in which the pledge is given to God), Americans will explain this by pointing out something that is not unique to America (such as having diverse cultures and religions within a country - something that is not even slightly unique to America).

Frazzled wrote:Whats so amazingly aweomse is how we don't care what Europeans think on the subject.

Is it stupid? Maybe. So's life.

So what? Its our country and our rules.

The concept of your Royal Family is utterly stupid, but if you like thats schtick then fine by me. I just want a set of the cool dragoon armor I see so I can wear on Halloween, or maybe the next time I have to go to the DMV.

Great post, like you purposely attempted to...

Wait... this is satire right? Ah Frazz, you are a hoot after all.

And my missus and her family (California) said Texas is full of flag waving-gun toting reactionary bigots/historical revisionists who wrongly think they are the lifeblood of the USA and should form their own country, and as a result it isn't worth visiting... wait until she reads this, she will change her tune and we can finally come see you!

sebster wrote:

LumenPraebeo wrote:Well....this country is made up of many different nationalities and religions, and as so, the american nationality is a collection of these. If there was no identity to it, then it would just be a collection of people in cities, cities in states, and states in a so-called nation. However, I do agree it is brainwashing. But I'm still not sure if it is a good or bad thing. The roots of a nation with a common cause must be established somewhere, or else its back to the 13/50 colonies all over again.

But this is the puzzling thing. When asked a question about a uniquely American thing (such as having a pledge of allegiance, let alone one in which the pledge is given to God), Americans will explain this by pointing out something that is not unique to America (such as having diverse cultures and religions within a country - something that is not even slightly unique to America).

Well, it was founded on the notion, what else would you have America say? It doesn't matter if its not unique does it? That's what happened, and we can't change what has already happened. Not yet anyway.
Also, I would like to point out again that the news is talking about this lady who is a bigot, and happens to be head of an educational organization. Not about freedom or what song is appropriate and not offensive or conceited.

Frazzled wrote:Whats so amazingly aweomse is how we don't care what Europeans think on the subject.

Except we do, hence all the comparisons.

What you mean is I don't.

Frazzled wrote:
Is it stupid? Maybe. So's life.

Then life is also smart.

Frazzled wrote:
So what? Its our country and our rules.

Puerto Rico?

LumenPraebeo wrote:Well, it was founded on the notion, what else would you have America say? It doesn't matter if its not unique does it? That's what happened, and we can't change what has already happened. Not yet anyway.

No, you miss the point. In asking the question 'why does America have this unique thing' it doesn't make sense to say 'because we have this thing that is not unique'. The answer doesn't work, because if a diverse population needed something to unite them, then all the religiously and ethnically diverse countries of the world would have something similar.

But they don't, so whatever the answer is to why America has a pledge and no-one else does, diversity ain't it. Which in itself wouldn't be that interesting, people suggest answers to questions all the time that aren't quite right, but what is interesting is that people ask questions about some unique attribute of America all the time, and the answers are almost always something that doesn't match.

Also, I would like to point out again that the news is talking about this lady who is a bigot, and happens to be head of an educational organization. Not about freedom or what song is appropriate and not offensive or conceited.

No, the story you linked to in your OP is talking about a terrible song getting swapped out for another terrible song. You just mentioned that the lady also happens to be a bigot.

dogma wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Whats so amazingly aweomse is how we don't care what Europeans think on the subject.

Except we do, hence all the comparisons.

What you mean is I don't.

Exactly. Frazz uses the term "we" in the infantile manner that kids arguing about football do, because any educated nation is a nation of contradictions. There are citizens that support gay marriage, there are also citizens that hate gays. They are both citizens.

Frazz meant "I" and thankfully Americans like him are a minority.

Why do you think I like Americans so much!

And that's why Obama won, and Palin is a laughing stock.

mattyrm wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Whats so amazingly aweomse is how we don't care what Europeans think on the subject.

Is it stupid? Maybe. So's life.

So what? Its our country and our rules.

The concept of your Royal Family is utterly stupid, but if you like thats schtick then fine by me. I just want a set of the cool dragoon armor I see so I can wear on Halloween, or maybe the next time I have to go to the DMV.

Great post, like you purposely attempted to...

Wait... this is satire right? Ah Frazz, you are a hoot after all.

And my missus and her family (California) said Texas is full of flag waving-gun toting reactionary bigots/historical revisionists who wrongly think they are the lifeblood of the USA and should form their own country, and as a result it isn't worth visiting... wait until she reads this, she will change her tune and we can finally come see you!

She wouldn't like my view of California and Californians then.
Did she notice her state's imploding as we speak budgetwise, whilst worrying about building a multibillion dollar high speed rail line?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

dogma wrote:Puerto Rico?

I hear they make excellent pork.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

mattyrm wrote:

dogma wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Whats so amazingly aweomse is how we don't care what Europeans think on the subject.

Except we do, hence all the comparisons.

What you mean is I don't.

Exactly. Frazz uses the term "we" in the infantile manner that kids arguing about football do, because any educated nation is a nation of contradictions. There are citizens that support gay marriage, there are also citizens that hate gays. They are both citizens.

Frazz meant "I" and thankfully Americans like him are a minority.

Why do you think I like Americans so much!

And that's why Obama won, and Palin is a laughing stock.

I don't think you understand. "We" means Texas, and all the other states Texas allowed to join it. "They" means everyone else. "You" means everyone who even so much as thinks about being on my lawn.

Frazzled wrote:
I hear they make excellent pork.

Nah, you want jerk.

dogma wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
I hear they make excellent pork.

Nah, you want jerk.

Que?